Now, I know what you'll write: "But SDW...you can't use short term weather patterns to argue against climate change...the glaciers are melting! C02 is rising! Polar bears are dying! We're all going to die! There are only 4 shopping days left until Christmas!"

My point exactly: We can't use short-term weather patterns as evidence. But the Global Warming Enthusiast Club does exactly that. We hear constantly about record temperatures in the summer that are "evidence" of climate change (notice how "global warming" is gone as a term since it's been totally discredited and mocked). We hear and read that global war...eh...climate change is causing record numbers of strong hurricanes. It's causing torrential rain. It's causing tornados. It's even causing blizzards!

However, it's nonsense. The only thing that matters is long-term temperature data. And we don't have it. Accurate records only go back maybe 100-150 years. Beyond that, it's all estimation. It's very good estimation, but it's still an estimate. The data we have shows around .6 degree increase, on average, over 100 years. Really? .6 degrees? There is so much potential for error in that number that it's nearly meaningless: Temperature measurement errors, urban heat island effect, clerical error and even fraud. Yet the Global Warming Enthusiast Club clings to it as evidence that we're all going to hell, temperature-wise. The smarter ones use other data, like Co2 levels. Of course, higher Co2 concentrations have never been shown to cause higher temperatures. But, they get themselves all tied up in discussing not only the "rate of change" in Co2, but the "rate of change of the rate of change." Perhaps they are not smarter after all. Perhaps they are just confused and suffering from pre-senile dementia.

But, I suppose I digress. The issue is that short-term weather patterns cannot be used as evidence for or against "climate--eh..global warm---eh--I mean....crap..what is it called today?"

Thoughts?

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

"A year ago, NASA scientist Gavin Schmidt was asked on RealClimate: “What percentage of global warming is due to human causes vs. natural causes?” His answer is straightforward:

Over the last 40 or so years, natural drivers would have caused cooling, and so the warming there has been … is caused by a combination of human drivers and some degree of internal variability. I would judge the maximum amplitude of the internal variability to be roughly 0.1 deg C over that time period, and so given the warming of ~0.5 deg C, I’d say somewhere between 80 to 120% of the warming. Slightly larger range if you want a large range for the internal stuff."
~ http://climateprogress.org/2010/11/0...es/#more-36129

"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.

"A year ago, NASA scientist Gavin Schmidt was asked on RealClimate: What percentage of global warming is due to human causes vs. natural causes? His answer is straightforward:

Over the last 40 or so years, natural drivers would have caused cooling, and so the warming there has been is caused by a combination of human drivers and some degree of internal variability. I would judge the maximum amplitude of the internal variability to be roughly 0.1 deg C over that time period, and so given the warming of ~0.5 deg C, Id say somewhere between 80 to 120% of the warming. Slightly larger range if you want a large range for the internal stuff."
~ http://climateprogress.org/2010/11/0...es/#more-36129

So you think it's funny we're killing ourselves? I want to vote for your party.

I'm betting that what he's laughing about is that in response to the question "What percentage of global warming is due to human causes?" the scientist took a long and circuitous route to say "between 80 and 120%."

And it is wasn't necessarily the long and circuitous route that was funny.

"A year ago, NASA scientist Gavin Schmidt was asked on RealClimate: “What percentage of global warming is due to human causes vs. natural causes?” His answer is straightforward:

Over the last 40 or so years, natural drivers would have caused cooling, and so the warming there has been … is caused by a combination of human drivers and some degree of internal variability. I would judge the maximum amplitude of the internal variability to be roughly 0.1 deg C over that time period, and so given the warming of ~0.5 deg C, I’d say somewhere between 80 to 120% of the warming. Slightly larger range if you want a large range for the internal stuff."
~ http://climateprogress.org/2010/11/0...es/#more-36129

That is actually a new one. I think I'll call it the Stimulus Argument for Global Warming. Supporters of that act said that while we had lost jobs, we would have had a lot more without the stimulus.

Now we have: "OK, I admit the Earth is not actually warming, but shit...it would have been cooling without human activity."

Much of the United States and Europe is suffering through extreme wintery weather conditions. But what is causing it?

Some have blamed global warming, specifically the Arctic paradox. However, AccuWeathers chief hurricane and long-range forecaster Joe Bastardi told the Fox Business Network on Tuesday you can chalk it up to three things oceans, sunspots and volcanoes.

A few years ago, about why we have to start looking for more and more of this [cold weather], Bastardi said. Its called the triple crown of cooling the natural reversal of the oceans cycles. Three years ago the Pacific went into the cold state. Solar activity, very low sunspot activity and volcanic activity, not the kind you see in the tropics but the kind we had in the Arctic regions a couple of winters ago and this is something that could be causing a return to for instance, the times of the Victorian era when they used to have ice fairs in the early-1800s around Christmastime on the Thames and youre seeing that type of thing go on.

As for those who are blaming global warming, Bastardi said that theory was childish and presented instead the possibility of long-term global cooling.

Well, Ive been saying what I believe is going on is this is the big debate between the natural cycles and the forces of AGW [anthropogenic global warming] by the way, these folks claiming that global warming is causing severe cold is like the kid on the playground who doesnt get his way and takes his ball home. The fact of the matter is the forecast that was made by this forecaster three years ago that we were going to start seeing these things because of this and it opens up the big debate are the natural cycles taking over and are we going to see cooling over the next 20 to 30 years? You see, we started measuring temperatures with satellite at the end of the last cold cycle in the Pacific. We had nothing but warm in the Pacific and warm in the Atlantic. Whats going to happen to the temperatures if the oceans are warm? Now that theyre cooling lets see whats going to happens in the next 20 to 30 years.

He said that the unseasonably cold winter is something that could be predicted and told viewers not to just blame global warming.

This is predictable if you study cycles, if you study climatology, Bastardi said. And dont just say everything is global warming.

But, Bastardi also warned of a drought that will in cause higher commodity prices.

I think the southern plains of the United States are starting evolve a drought now, Bastardi said. This dryness that youre seeing in Texas I think will evolve into spring and summer time and Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas into the lower Mississippi valley looked to me to be very dry this upcoming summer and nothing like crazy weather. It is the pattern and what the pattern dictates.

There continue to be claims that the extreme cold weather in western Europe, in southeast Australia, and elsewhere are not inconsistent with a more-or-less monotonic annual globally averaged warming. However, theese reports continue to miss the point that it is the regional anomalies that matter far more in terms of effects on society and the environment.

Quote:

Moreover, until and unless they can skillfully predict observationally documented CHANGES in the statistics (probabilities) of the different major circulation patterns, their explanations are necessarily flawed.

I think that climate change has now been relegated to the UN, which is powerless. With a new mostly GOP Congress, the US won't be passing any cap and trade schemes. I believe global warming will simply fade away as a fad of the decade. We'll be talking about global cooling in 15 years, just as we were in the 1970s. Nothing changes.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

I think that climate change has now been relegated to the UN, which is powerless. With a new mostly GOP Congress, the US won't be passing any cap and trade schemes. I believe global warming will simply fade away as a fad of the decade. We'll be talking about global cooling in 15 years, just as we were in the 1970s. Nothing changes.

Certain mindsets don't change that's for sure.

We could be in the midst of a nuclear fucking meltdown and the denialist voices will still be telling themselves - yes, that's all they're doing, programming themselves - that all is ok as they head down the mall to wander about like the Stepford Wives and buying whatever shite meets their gaze.

They can't adapt. Soon they will be swept aside like the brontosauri they are.

Excellent analogy actually: massive beasts with small brains who look fierce but aren't and make a lot of noise while trampling anything smaller underfoot all blissfully unaware.

Luckily the metaphorical meteorite is accelerating on its collision course as we speak.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

Dear Global Warming Enthusiasts: You can never talk about how hot it is in the summer as "evidence" of global warming again. Ever. The issue is that short-term weather patterns cannot be used as evidence for or against "climate--eh..global warm---eh--I mean....crap..what is it called today?"

Thoughts?

Yes, climate change is real, but cannot be demonstrated by short-term weather patterns except that if you take, as a whole, all kinds of more erratic short-term weather patterns as evidence of climate change. Makes sense?

The warning of climate change is not merely that "things are getting hotter oh my", but we are *fundamentally* f^cking up the global climatic system. The implications of which are impossible to fathom at this stage.

I think that climate change has now been relegated to the UN, which is powerless. With a new mostly GOP Congress, the US won't be passing any cap and trade schemes. I believe global warming will simply fade away as a fad of the decade. We'll be talking about global cooling in 15 years, just as we were in the 1970s. Nothing changes.

And so the world will be better off in 15 years? Or are we always neither better-nor-worse-off as a planet, species, humankind, whatever?

They certainly don't change. That is what SDW is pointing out precisely. No one is going to buy a protoscience that has become more about the grant dollars and attempts at control than being predictive. Shouldn't science have some predictive power rather than saying, please give us a virgin to throw into the volcano or you will die because your crops won't grow?

That mindset and the control it attempts are indeed the oldest thing around here.

Quote:

We could be in the midst of a nuclear fucking meltdown and the denialist voices will still be telling themselves - yes, that's all they're doing, programming themselves - that all is ok as they head down the mall to wander about like the Stepford Wives and buying whatever shite meets their gaze.

Yes and did you tell that to anyone taking their private jets into the various climate conferences to discuss this problem? Did you worry about this when all those wonderful rock stars and their fans get together to spew their gigantic volumes of carbon to celebrate their caring? Have you chastized your own offspring yet for breathing out and wanting stuff?

Quote:

They can't adapt. Soon they will be swept aside like the brontosauri they are.

I suspect you are wrong. Humans aren't like a rooted plant. When the climate has changed, they have certainly adapted and will continue to do so. The ones perishing are those who can't afford heat due to government regulation or who can't live life without the government dole. They are the ones getting ready to go extinct for these governments are no longer able to afford to buy their votes or live their lives for them.

Quote:

Excellent analogy actually: massive beasts with small brains who look fierce but aren't and make a lot of noise while trampling anything smaller underfoot all blissfully unaware.

Luckily the metaphorical meteorite is accelerating on its collision course as we speak.

Have Happy Holidays Sego.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Nicely put.

I think not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Yes, climate change is real, but cannot be demonstrated by short-term weather patterns except that if you take, as a whole, all kinds of more erratic short-term weather patterns as evidence of climate change. Makes sense?

What makes sense is climate science being predictive and when it isn't, then it isn't science but something else, perhaps a worldview, philosophy or something different.

Those things can bring about change or influence as well. They can even be declared to be morally better or worse, etc. However don't call them science. Likewise any science that puts the earth at the center of what is happening and ignores the sun as the cause historically hasn't done very well and in hindsight, looks like a laughing stock. Suggesting that pattern will arrive here too makes plenty of sense.

As for "making sense" plenty of theories can explain 80% of phenomena but getting them truly accurate can require substantial revision. I can note that these planet-thingies are in a circular orbit. Then having to note it isn't around the Earth, and that they are ellipses rather than circles requires SUBSTANTIAL revision to the understanding. Global climate prediction is no different. It is ridiculous for people to claim these primitive models and and proxies are a true science yet. They are a proto-science at best and when the results aren't being used to improve understanding, but to attempt to alter lifestyles and control people, then the motives are laid bare.

Humans have survived much worse than anything predicted by global climate change. Historical climate variation has already occurred, driven purely by natural processes, on a wide variation and humans did just fine. Why are we supposed to believe this time will be different?

Are we supposed to believe that carbon isn't a zero sum game. Is the claim now that there is NEW carbon coming into the system? How come the sequestering of all this carbon didn't put us in danger? Why is it that only this right number, generated from some line drawn conveniently right before industrial life began is exactly the "right" amount of carbon dioxide? Sure history has shown massive variation from that but this is "right" for what reason again?

Quote:

The warning of climate change is not merely that "things are getting hotter oh my", but we are *fundamentally* f^cking up the global climatic system. The implications of which are impossible to fathom at this stage.

Sorry but "fucked up" isn't very predictive. It pretty much allows you to claim a platitude as a prediction. Here in So Cal the weather is always generally very nice, but the times it isn't, it always isn't in different ways. We are very glad for our 275 days of sun a year because the other days involve earthquakes, mudslides, fires and all sort of nastiness. Someone out there spins a giant cosmic wheel and it gets to suck in different ways a little bit each year. That isn't climate change and it has been that way for as long as history has been recorded here. Saying the weather is going to change, but we can't tell you how or why isn't science. The weather has always been changing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

And so the world will be better off in 15 years? Or are we always neither better-nor-worse-off as a planet, species, humankind, whatever?

I suspect that unless we are under a wonderful communistic/authoritarian government, that things will be much better for humans as a species in 15 years. That has been the trend for quite a while now and I see nothing to make it stop. I do see who has the power and the wealth possibly changing as Europe self destructs and the U.S and several other countries go head to head seeing who can find the middle ground on advancement and demography. However I see no cause for fatalism.

They certainly don't change. That is what SDW is pointing out precisely. No one is going to buy a protoscience that has become more about the grant dollars and attempts at control than being predictive. Shouldn't science have some predictive power rather than saying, please give us a virgin to throw into the volcano or you will die because your crops won't grow?

In relation to the mindsets I am talking about it wouldn't matter.

There is NO science they would accept and I even question whether they are capable of understanding it.

I've noticed a certain overlap with the Right here and there's more than an overlap with the Christian-Right - and we all know about their relationship with science.

Quote:

That mindset and the control it attempts are indeed the oldest thing around here.

It exists only in certain people's heads - I have no idea of their age in earth-years but I tend to agree: conservatives are usually old.

Certainly they give the appearance of never having been young. And they are uncool.

Quote:

Yes and did you tell that to anyone taking their private jets into the various climate conferences to discuss this problem? Did you worry about this when all those wonderful rock stars and their fans get together to spew their gigantic volumes of carbon to celebrate their caring? Have you chastized your own offspring yet for breathing out and wanting stuff?

I don't know them so I don't tell them but I've said it many times here I think. I'll say it again:

If I think of the most hypocritical scumbag wanker tossface fuckheads known to man the list would probably go something like this:

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Dalai Lama

Jermeny Fucking Clarkson

Bob Geldof

You see - and I know you don't get this so I'll try to explain for the 1000th time - they are all AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE FUCKING STATUS QUO!!!!!!!

And I don't mean a God-awful seventies band who can only play two chords (though they are Mozart in comparison to Bonio's sordid output).

So yes, if I met Bonio I'd tell him...but I'd punch his lights out first. he annoys me.

Regarding my own offspring; they don't actually 'want stuff' as it happens and the only chastizing I have to do at the moment is stopping my 11 year old verbally attacking people who wear fur coats (abusing such tossers is a good thing obviously - but we need control and have to learn not to blow our cover don't we?)

Quote:

I suspect you are wrong. Humans aren't like a rooted plant. When the climate has changed, they have certainly adapted and will continue to do so. The ones perishing are those who can't afford heat due to government regulation or who can't live life without the government dole. They are the ones getting ready to go extinct for these governments are no longer able to afford to buy their votes or live their lives for them.

They will not be extinct. They are the foundation of the coming change.

It's a shame they had to nearly die for them to realize who was trying to kill them - or, let's be charitable, who cared only for profit and 'the system' and was willing to sacrifice them to keep their snouts in the trough.

Quote:

Have Happy Holidays Sego.

Christmas Trumpy...it's CHRISTMAS. This may surprise you but I am not actually a Christian - but even so....it's "HAPPY CHRISTMAS" not "HAPPY HOLIDAYS"

Quote:

I think not.

We know.....

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

There is NO science they would accept and I even question whether they are capable of understanding it.

I've noticed a certain overlap with the Right here and there's more than an overlap with the Christian-Right - and we all know about their relationship with science.

You're being so charitable today Sego. It is so nice of you to suggest there's a question of capability of understanding. That puts the right a full several steps above the left where we know there is no rational discourse, only a focus on platitudes, feelings and good intentions. Plus history has shown what happens when they attempt scientific understanding. You get those nice attempts at scientific socialism which have lead to eugenics and purges of those who disagree. Those deaths are in the tens of millions but really I'm sure that is small potatoes compared to the number of lives they care to affect or better still, end this go around.

Quote:

It exists only in certain people's heads - I have no idea of their age in earth-years but I tend to agree: conservatives are usually old.

Certainly they give the appearance of never having been young. And they are uncool.

They are old and uncool. That certainly sounds like a scientific basis to discredit whatever they would have to add to discussion. Better still since they are suffering so badly, why not just send them off to wherever we put such dinosaurs. They can take a nice shower in that gas chamber, perhaps they can help advance science by being a testing subject. They could also go to wherever it is the government chooses to send people who think incorrectly. It used to be Siberia but perhaps now it could be Spain, Greece or one of the other PIIGS of Europe who will end up second tier.

Also while this is all good fun and games, it still doesn't change the notion that claiming to influence environment and weather is as old a ruse as exists. It is perhaps the very superstition that led to the creation of organized religions. No doubt it is the foundational theme of this newest climate change religion that claims to make Goddess Gaia happy with our small sacrifices.

Quote:

I don't know them so I don't tell them but I've said it many times here I think. I'll say it again:

If I think of the most hypocritical scumbag wanker tossface fuckheads known to man the list would probably go something like this:

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Bonio

Dalai Lama

Jermeny Fucking Clarkson

Bob Geldof

You see - and I know you don't get this so I'll try to explain for the 1000th time - they are all AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE FUCKING STATUS QUO!!!!!!!

And I don't mean a God-awful seventies band who can only play two chords (though they are Mozart in comparison to Bonio's sordid output).

So yes, if I met Bonio I'd tell him...but I'd punch his lights out first. he annoys me.

That list clearly is Eurocentric. At a minimum add Wes Anderson to it please before he makes the same movie for the 7th time.

Quote:

Regarding my own offspring; they don't actually 'want stuff' as it happens and the only chastizing I have to do at the moment is stopping my 11 year old verbally attacking people who wear fur coats (abusing such tossers is a good thing obviously - but we need control and have to learn not to blow our cover don't we?)

Why teach them to hide in the shadows? Why allow the "tossers" their relative comfort?

Quote:

They will not be extinct. They are the foundation of the coming change.

It's a shame they had to nearly die for them to realize who was trying to kill them - or, let's be charitable, who cared only for profit and 'the system' and was willing to sacrifice them to keep their snouts in the trough.

You're so charitable indeed this day. I doubt this group, which statistically is rather likely to have several children, several early health ailments, be undereducated, and be rather worried about their loss of cigs and binge drinking ingredients, will lift more than their remote to their telly to bring about any change in their lives. Their whole worldview and language use suggests fatalism. It's hard to be an agent of change when the fates are merely conspiring against you. Plus they might miss EastEnders if they got up and did something.

Quote:

Christmas Trumpy...it's CHRISTMAS. This may surprise you but I am not actually a Christian - but even so....it's "HAPPY CHRISTMAS" not "HAPPY HOLIDAYS"

You're being so charitable today Sego. It is so nice of you to suggest there's a question of capability of understanding. That puts the right a full several steps above the left where we know there is no rational discourse, only a focus on platitudes, feelings and good intentions. Plus history has shown what happens when they attempt scientific understanding. You get those nice attempts at scientific socialism which have lead to eugenics and purges of those who disagree. Those deaths are in the tens of millions but really I'm sure that is small potatoes compared to the number of lives they care to affect or better still, end this go around.

They are old and uncool. That certainly sounds like a scientific basis to discredit whatever they would have to add to discussion.

No scientific basis is needed unfortunately. they have nothing to add to the discussion...that's the whole point.

We can up their rating when (if) they do.

Quote:

Better still since they are suffering so badly, why not just send them off to wherever we put such dinosaurs. They can take a nice shower in that gas chamber, perhaps they can help advance science by being a testing subject. They could also go to wherever it is the government chooses to send people who think incorrectly. It used to be Siberia but perhaps now it could be Spain, Greece or one of the other PIIGS of Europe who will end up second tier.

That would probably bolster the Capitalist system - didn't the US build whole markets on Nazi research? I know they used the human testing data for medicine and employed Nazis like Werner von Braun whose other inventions cost hundreds of thousands of lives.

I couldn't support that...

Besides, no need. Nature is in control.

Quote:

Also while this is all good fun and games, it still doesn't change the notion that claiming to influence environment and weather is as old a ruse as exists. It is perhaps the very superstition that led to the creation of organized religions. No doubt it is the foundational theme of this newest climate change religion that claims to make Goddess Gaia happy with our small sacrifices.

Personally I do not believe that religion is founded on superstition. Quite the contrary - it is founded on truth. it is later that it degenerates into superstition....alongside other evils like Capitalism, authoritarianism, right-wing thought and sexual perversions.

I think these things may well be linked.

Quote:

That list clearly is Eurocentric. At a minimum add Wes Anderson to it please before he makes the same movie for the 7th time.

Who is he? I'd gladly put him on if he makes the grade....

Quote:

Why teach them to hide in the shadows? Why allow the "tossers" their relative comfort?

Because I believe in the old values: politeness, nobility, self-respect.

It's not a question of training a gorilla to chuck a brick through a window - satisfying though that can be - these things need a sophisticated and elegant touch.

It's chess. It should be a thing of beauty.

We don't carpet-bomb. We undermine from within.

Quote:

You're so charitable indeed this day. I doubt this group, which statistically is rather likely to have several children, several early health ailments, be undereducated, and be rather worried about their loss of cigs and binge drinking ingredients, will lift more than their remote to their telly to bring about any change in their lives. Their whole worldview and language use suggests fatalism. It's hard to be an agent of change when the fates are merely conspiring against you. Plus they might miss EastEnders if they got up and did something.

Indeed...that is probably correct. The conditioning is very strong.

But if somehow things can be made better for them they will soon see that they no longer need to binge drink, can afford an education and rise above Eastenders as well as have fewer health ailments - though on the odd chanve they might fall ill there will be full healthcare available.

Quote:

Feliz Navidad for you Sego.

Bon Nadal Trumpy!!!

Nadolig llawen a blwyddyn newydd dda! (that's in Welsh!)

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

I wasn't speaking at all about Nazism. I was speaking about the communistic purges and policies that took place in Russia, China, etc.

Quote:

No scientific basis is needed unfortunately. they have nothing to add to the discussion...that's the whole point.

We can up their rating when (if) they do.

When the goal is control, as it appears it is with global warming, then you are correct that those who do not wish to control have little to add to the discussion. You can't gain much by declaring people can go on living their lives and the planet will continue on as it has for billions of years. That doesn't do much to give pause nor cause anyone to give up their daily freedoms.

Quote:

That would probably bolster the Capitalist system - didn't the US build whole markets on Nazi research? I know they used the human testing data for medicine and employed Nazis like Werner von Braun whose other inventions cost hundreds of thousands of lives.

I couldn't support that...

Besides, no need. Nature is in control.

Again, I'm talking about what happens with leftist governments. I'm talking about those who believe the population must be halved and the half that remains ought be the supermen. I'm talking about those who's first job is to pass out contraception to the lower classes. I'm talking about the worldview that notes a life isn't worth anything unless considered with the "quality" of life.

Always need to crack a few eggs so there's no concern right? We all get to utopia but the undesirables never see the promised land and that is okay. In the promised land they wouldn't have been born. They would have been given the choice to die early. This is is just the messy clean up so no worries.

Quote:

Personally I do not believe that religion is founded on superstition. Quite the contrary - it is founded on truth. it is later that it degenerates into superstition....alongside other evils like Capitalism, authoritarianism, right-wing thought and sexual perversions.

I think these things may well be linked.

Well the evils of communism and socilialism aren't superstitions. They are well documented. We don't have to ponder if they are linked. It is well known. Likewise the authoritarianism is well known as are wonderful perversions like one child policies, infanticide, forced abortions and so forth.

Quote:

Who is he? I'd gladly put him on if he makes the grade....

He's made several movies, only they all end up being the same movie. The protagonists are always male upper class elites. They suffer from leisure-class malaise for lack of a better title. They must go on a journey that often involves slow motion shots over British Invasion tunes. The journey involves use of several drugs, a sexual encounter or two. Often there is an attempt to reconnect with family, often with mother who helps reveal their father was a fraud in some fashion or helps them communicate with their father who then reveals he was a fraud in some fashion. In the end everyone feels a bit better and tries to move on but... well not really which is why the film has to be remade again under a different title.

Quote:

Because I believe in the old values: politeness, nobility, self-respect.

It's not a question of training a gorilla to chuck a brick through a window - satisfying though that can be - these things need a sophisticated and elegant touch.

It's chess. It should be a thing of beauty.

We don't carpet-bomb. We undermine from within.

So I take it they will be good members of the Fabian Society?

Quote:

Indeed...that is probably correct. The conditioning is very strong.

But if somehow things can be made better for them they will soon see that they no longer need to binge drink, can afford an education and rise above Eastenders as well as have fewer health ailments - though on the odd chanve they might fall ill there will be full healthcare available.

The fates might see fit to smile upon them and if the fates do that, things might change.

Quote:

Bon Nadal Trumpy!!!

Nadolig llawen a blwyddyn newydd dda! (that's in Welsh!)

The new year will bring many interesting things but likely, the same old weather but with new titles!

Yes, climate change is real, but cannot be demonstrated by short-term weather patterns except that if you take, as a whole, all kinds of more erratic short-term weather patterns as evidence of climate change. Makes sense?

The warning of climate change is not merely that "things are getting hotter oh my", but we are *fundamentally* f^cking up the global climatic system. The implications of which are impossible to fathom at this stage.

No, it doesn't make sense. Short-term weather does nothing to reinforce the notion of global warming. And that's really what we're talking about here, sego. "Climate change" has replaced the term "global warming", and not because it's the more appropriate term as you suggest. It's replaced it for two reasons. 1) "Global warming" has been criticized to the point where it's losing its credibility as a theory and 2) It's much easier to blame a wider variety of phenomena on "climate change," as it sounds more inclusive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by segovius

Certain mindsets don't change that's for sure.

We could be in the midst of a nuclear fucking meltdown and the denialist voices will still be telling themselves - yes, that's all they're doing, programming themselves - that all is ok as they head down the mall to wander about like the Stepford Wives and buying whatever shite meets their gaze.

They can't adapt. Soon they will be swept aside like the brontosauri they are.

Excellent analogy actually: massive beasts with small brains who look fierce but aren't and make a lot of noise while trampling anything smaller underfoot all blissfully unaware.

Luckily the metaphorical meteorite is accelerating on its collision course as we speak.

I find it amazing that on this one issue, usually scientific-minded people refuse to embrace the scientific method, and instead embrace dogma. There is little to no evidence that the Earth is warming significantly. There is little to no evidence that "carbon" emissions cause warming. What we have is many theories. We also have the suppression of scientific discourse, media charlatans like Al Gore running presenting pseudo-science for political and financial gain, nefarious characters that see the whole issue as a way to institute their dreams of consolidated power, interests who seek to damage the US economy, and even those who commit outright fraud in their pursuit of global warming dogma.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

And so the world will be better off in 15 years? Or are we always neither better-nor-worse-off as a planet, species, humankind, whatever?

I have no idea. What I'm saying is that any problems we do have won't be as a result of "global warming." It's important to note that I'm not arguing for pollution. We need to make strides to reduce pollution and care for our environment. We need to begin to transitions from oil and eventually from fossil fuels. But this will be a very long process, one that will consume more than my lifetime. If we truly put our resources behind it, we could greatly reduce oil usage and transition to resources like natural gas over the course of the next 20-50 years, all while building up our solar, wind, nuclear and geothermal capabilities. Eventually, I would like to see our energy needs met by a combination of all those sources, with oil not being used a fuel anymore (it has many other uses, of course). But in the meantime, I'm not going to panic of "global warming."

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

I wasn't speaking at all about Nazism. I was speaking about the communistic purges and policies that took place in Russia, China, etc.

Well.... last time I looked Russia and China were reaching their ultimate goal of realizing the Capitalist dream so maybe that was just a step on the way...usually is.

Quote:

When the goal is control, as it appears it is with global warming,

Appears to who?

The only control I see these days is Police and Right-wing authorities exerting and the odd Neo-Nazi/fascist group trying to get it.

Quote:

then you are correct that those who do not wish to control have little to add to the discussion. You can't gain much by declaring people can go on living their lives and the planet will continue on as it has for billions of years. That doesn't do much to give pause nor cause anyone to give up their daily freedoms.

Again, I'm talking about what happens with leftist governments. I'm talking about those who believe the population must be halved and the half that remains ought be the supermen.

Have you been reading Churchill again?

It's old hat now.... the right have different methods. besides, it's Muslims they want to kill off now and they don't need Eugenics...there's more crude tools available.

Quote:

I'm talking about those who's first job is to pass out contraception to the lower classes.

Oh..ok...you mean that Right-wing fundie US woman who pays them to be sterilized...with you there...

Quote:

I'm talking about the worldview that notes a life isn't worth anything unless considered with the "quality" of life.

Amen again......another useless pice of extreme-Right 'thought'.

Quote:

Always need to crack a few eggs so there's no concern right? We all get to utopia but the undesirables never see the promised land and that is okay. In the promised land they wouldn't have been born. They would have been given the choice to die early. This is is just the messy clean up so no worries.

Eggs do indeed sometimes need to be cracked. Sometimes there are even 'bad eggs'.

Quote:

Well the evils of communism and socilialism aren't superstitions. They are well documented. We don't have to ponder if they are linked. It is well known. Likewise the authoritarianism is well known as are wonderful perversions like one child policies, infanticide, forced abortions and so forth.

I think I said elsewhere there were some evils: Capitalism and Authoritarianism did indeed creep in..

Quote:

He's made several movies, only they all end up being the same movie. The protagonists are always male upper class elites. They suffer from leisure-class malaise for lack of a better title. They must go on a journey that often involves slow motion shots over British Invasion tunes. The journey involves use of several drugs, a sexual encounter or two. Often there is an attempt to reconnect with family, often with mother who helps reveal their father was a fraud in some fashion or helps them communicate with their father who then reveals he was a fraud in some fashion. In the end everyone feels a bit better and tries to move on but... well not really which is why the film has to be remade again under a different title.

Sounds great!!! I don't think that would make my list at all....I'm going to check this out....

Quote:

So I take it they will be good members of the Fabian Society?

No...they are in the learning stage at the moment. When they have learnt how it is they'll be free to join what they want - except by then things will no longer be the same..

Quote:

The fates might see fit to smile upon them and if the fates do that, things might change.

Things will indeed change.

Quote:

The new year will bring many interesting things but likely, the same old weather but with new titles!

I think there's more in store than that....definitely will be some stormy weather though and some are going to feel a cold chill....

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

Why do we continue to listen to warmists when they're so wrong? Maybe it's because their real agenda has nothing to do with climate change at all. Earlier this month, attendees of a global warming summit in Cancun, Mexico, concluded, with virtually no economic or real scientific support, that by 2020 rich nations need to transfer $100 billion a year to poor nations to help them "mitigate" the adverse impacts of warming.

This is what global warming is really about — wealth redistribution by people whose beliefs are basically socialist. It has little or nothing to do with climate. If it did, we might pay more attention to Piers Corbyn, a little-known British meteorologist and astrophysicist who has a knack for correctly predicting weather changes. Indeed, as London's Mayor Boris Johnson recently noted, "He seems to get it right about 85% of the time."

How does he do it? Unlike the U.N. and government forecasters, Corbyn pays close attention to solar cycles that, as it turns out, correlate very closely to changes in climate. Not only are we not headed for global warming, Corbyn says, we may be entering a "mini ice age" similar to the one that took place from 1450 A.D. to 1850 A.D.

Dear Global Warming Enthusiasts: You can never talk about how hot it is in the summer as "evidence" of global warming again. Ever.

Now, I know what you'll write: [I]"But SDW...you can't use short term weather patterns to argue against climate change...

However, it's nonsense. The only thing that matters is long-term temperature data. And we don't have it. Accurate records only go back maybe 100-150 years.

Thoughts?

But SDW....The weather pattern for the last 100-150 years may be enough to show that the climate is getting warmer. Also other data which can show climate trends and patterns are more reliable than you think....and there is more and more evidence pointing to "global warming."

The reliable instrumental record only goes back 150 years in the CRU analysis, 125 in the NASA analysis. This is a simple fact that we are stuck with. 2005 was the warmest year recorded in that period according to NASA, a very close second according to CRU. Because of this limit, it is not enough to say today that these are the warmest years since 150 years ago, rather one should say 'at least':

But there is another direct measurement record available that can tell us things about temperature over the last 500 years, and that is borehole measurements. This involves drilling a deep hole and measuring the temperature of the earth at various depths. It gives us information about century-scale temperature trends, as warmer or cooler pulses from long term surface changes propagate down through the crust.

Using this method we can see that temperatures have not been consistently this high as far back as this method allows us to look. This way of inferring surface temperatures does smooth out yearly fluctuations and even short term trends, so we can not know anything directly about individual years. But given the observable range of inter-annual variations recorded over the last century, it is quite reasonable to rule out single years or even decades being far enough above the baseline to rival today.

Using this record, we can reasonably conclude that it is warmer now than any time in at least the last 500 years.

National Snow & Ice Data Center explains Bastardi can't read graphs and "is unclear as to how standardized anomalies are derived"
UPDATE:* Bastardi responded in the comments here.* He couldnt bring himself to admit that his accusation of fraud against NSIDC was not merely completely unwarranted but totally inappropriate and in fact based in part on his simple misreading of a graph.* Finally, though, on Sunday afternoon, Accuweather took the post down and Bastardi admits in his new Emily Litella post his charge was baseless......

Joe Bastardi is the chief hurricane and long-range forecaster at AccuWeather and a national bodybuilding competitor. I cant speak to his physical strength but he bench-presses a staggering amount of anti-science disinformation (see Joe Bastardi cant read a temperature anomaly map).

To switch metaphors, he has now snowed his readers with a blizzard of inane predictions.

At StageCollege.com, his piece, The Weather Year of a Lifetime, argues he will never live to see another summer like this one. At his European blog, he says, And for the ministers of propaganda on this matter that dont understand how this works, you will see NEXT SUMMER has the highest amount of sea ice since the early part of last decade. Seriously!

His predictions are based on his love of the satellite temperature data, which he simply doesnt understand...

無心The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey

Physicist John Cook, who runs the must-read website Skeptical Science, has published The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism.* Its a good introduction to global warming science and skepticism.
He kindly agreed to send me the 8 figures of the human fingerprints on climate change, which I repost below.

The clever deniers these days dont deny the painfully obvious reality that the planet is warming or that climate is changing they simply deny that humans are a major cause.

Peter Sinclairs latest addition to the Climate Denial Crock of the Week debunks the idiotic they changed it to climate change after 1998 meme they being the IPCC which apparently the paranoid delusionals (aka climate change Deniers) thought stood for International Panel for Coerced Collectivization

As both the video and Joseph Romm note, the irony is the fact that it was the Republicans & Deniers who made calling it climate change a priority because global warming was too scary. (foreshadowing - when our collective inaction on climate leads to the inevitable social collapse the Deniers will blame scientists and progressives for the inaction).

無心The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey

A common claim, made by those who deny man made global warming, is that the Earth has been cooling recently. 1998 was the first year claimed by 'skeptics' for "Global Cooling". Then 1995 followed by 2002. 'Skeptics' have also emphasized the year 2007-2008 and most recently the last half of 2010.

NASA and climate scientists throughout the world have said, however, that the years starting since 1998 have been the hottest in all recorded temperature history. Do these claims sound confusing and contradictory? Has the Earth been cooling, lately?

To find out whether there is actually a "cooling trend" it is important to consider all of these claims as a whole, since they follow the same pattern. In making these claims, 'skeptics' take short periods of time, usually about 10 years or less, out of context ("Cherry picked.") from 30 years of evidence; the minimum needed to make a valid judgment.

'Skeptics' also take selected areas of the world where cold records for the recent past are being set while ignoring other areas where all time heat records are being set......

Contrary to some post here and in ClimateGate, global temperature trend over past 30 years has been increasing. You might have an area that might have a abnormally cold winter in one area, but this does not negate the overall global trend.

Figure 1: University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) temperature chart from January 1979 to November 2010. This chart is shown with no trend lines so the viewer may make his own judgment.
The temperature chart is based on information acquired from NASA heat sensing satellites. It covers a 30 year period from 1979 to the present. The red curve indicates the average temperature throughout the entire Earth.

The red line represents the average temperature.The top of the curves are warmer years caused by El Niño; a weather phenomenon where the Pacific Ocean gives out heat thus warming the Earth. The bottoms of the curves are usually La Niña years which cool the Earth. Volcanic eruptions, like Mount Pinatubo in 1991 will also cool the Earth so they are not counted. Although they are effected by Global Warming, El Niños and La Niñas occur whether or not there is Global Warming.

Figure 2: Illustration of how 'skeptics' distort the evidence.
The same temperature chart, showing how 'skeptics', manipulate the data to give the impression that 'Global Cooling' began in 1998. They left out 19 years of inconvenient data as well as failed to make a distinction between warm El Niños and cool La Niñas.